[Dovecot] spamc can't seem to call /usr/lib/dovecot/deliver

[/dev/rob0]

On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 02:04:39PM -0400, Bill Shirley wrote:
> On 10/24/2012 1:39 PM, /dev/rob0 wrote:
> >On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 01:28:41PM -0400, Bill Shirley wrote:
> >>On 10/24/2012 12:32 PM, /dev/rob0 wrote:
> >>>On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 02:52:45PM -0600, Troy Vitullo wrote:
> >snip
> >>>>postfix/pipe[3607]: 50DEFF180EE: to=<[mail]>, relay=dovecot,
> >>>>delay=1.7, delays=0.07/0.01/0/1.6, dsn=4.3.0, status=deferred
> >>>>(system resource problem)

> >>>The poster who was talking about postconf(5) mailbox_command
> >>>was bringing in a red herring. That is for local(8) delivery,
> >>>and you evidently are using pipe(8).

> >>Just a note: the original post did NOT have the word 'virtual'
> >>in it. If it did, I missed it and apologize for introducing 
> >>confusion.

> >It did not, but it did indeed include the pipe log output shown
> >above, and therefore ^mailbox_.* postconf settings do not apply.
> 
> Could be he was going about it the wrong way; mixing the two.
> Do you know whether he's trying to do virtual or local?

There are lots of wrong ways. The most wrongful of the OP's ways I 
found was the misuse of the dovecot user. The second most wrong, 
which was the actual problem at hand, was a misunderstanding of how 
group permissions are applied.

Mixing virtual and local in Postfix and Dovecot is no problem at all, 
and in fact multiple modes of delivery are possible, even within a 
given address class or even within a domain.

All we know here is what the OP posted. You don't usually use pipe 
for delivery to local (Unix) users.

> My postings describe my implementation.

For the OP to change to local delivery would require reworking his 
setup extensively, on the Postfix side, and here we are on the 
Dovecot list, so I wouldn't go into that here. But sure, there are 
other (and for many purposes, better) means of doing what he might 
want to do.

> I'm just trying to help him.  But I don't think my posts are
> being received that way.

Regarding Robert's "flame" comment in the other subthread, I agree 
with you; I saw no flame. And I did not suggest that you were not 
trying to help.
-- 
  http://rob0.nodns4.us/ -- system administration and consulting
  Offlist GMX mail is seen only if "/dev/rob0" is in the Subject: